Re: MD Theism, Non-Theism, Anti-Theism, Nihilism

From: Michael Hamilton (thethemichael@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Jul 16 2005 - 15:00:16 BST

  • Next message: Arlo J. Bensinger: "Re: MD Theism, Non-Theism, Anti-Theism, Nihilism"

    Hi everyone,

    I'd just like to correct a glaring error, and to re-state my case:
    that to call the MOQ "anti-theistic" or "non-theistic" is misleading
    at best, because Quality is synonymous with many theological
    conceptions of God (that's "God" when stripped of centuries of
    accumulated misunderstanding and idolatry by society at large).

    > > Scott Quotes:
    > > >" The MOQ would add a fourth stage where the term "God" is completely
    > > >dropped as a relic of an evil social suppression of intellectual and Dynamic
    > > >freedom. The MOQ is not just atheistic in this regard. It is
    > > >anti-theistic. "
    >
    > This just strikes me as a ridiculously simplistic appraisal of Western
    > religion. Pirsig [NOT Copleston, who I mistakenly assumed to be some mysterious MOQ commentator] is absolutely right that religion *has* been used
    > by the proponents of social value to suppress intellectual enquiry.
    > But isn't it very unwise to judge religion in general by this fact?
    > I'm happy to drop the term "God" where it alludes to some "guy in the
    > sky" who literally made the world in 7 days and has the power to judge
    > you when you die. But to reduce every idea of God to that, is to
    > destroy any understanding of that way Westerners experienced reality
    > before the scientific revolution - you know, before the taking-hold of
    > SOM that most of us want to escape. Also, a thoroughgoing
    > anti-theistic attitude goes directly against one of main thrusts of
    > Lila - that intellect should not be trying to obliterate social value,
    > but to improve it.
    >
    > From Wikipedia:
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Theism is the belief in one or more gods or goddesses. More
    > specifically, it may also mean the belief in God, a god, or gods, who
    > is/are actively involved in maintaining the Universe. This secondary
    > meaning is shown in context to other beliefs concerning the divine
    > below.
    >
    > The term is attested in English from 1678, and was probably coined to
    > contrast with atheism attested from ca. 1587 (see the etymology
    > section of atheism for details).
    >
    > The primary meaning sees four major views of the role of the divine in
    > the world in this context:
    >
    > 1. deism, the view that God created the world but does not interact
    > with it; emphasis on deities' transcendence
    > 2. theism, (second definition), the view that God is immanent in the
    > world, yet transcends it;
    > 3. panentheism, the view that the world is entirely contained within
    > God, while at the same time God is something greater than just the
    > world.
    > 4. pantheism, the view that the world is identical to God; emphasis on
    > deities' immanence
    > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >
    > After reading 2 and 4, can you really tell me that the idea of Quality
    > (as reality) doesn't have at least a flavour of theism?

    Regards,
    Mike

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 16 2005 - 17:22:50 BST